I’m one of very few who really doesn’t mind the current system. I know it’s very subjective, but that’s what makes it unique. No other sport is discussed 365/24/7 like college football, and the controversy in deciding a champion is a big contributor to that. It’s why the regular season means so much. Losing one regular season game can legitimately ruin your chances of playing for a national championship. I think that’s great, and makes rivalries much more intense.

Need I remind you, not so long ago, there wasn’t a championship game matching up the no. 1 and no. 2 ranked teams (In the 56 years before the BCS, the nation’s top two teams met in a bowl game eight times). Often, a no. 1 or 2 ranked team just had to beat a team ranked somewhere between no. 5-10 in their bowl game to be crowned national champion. For all the negativity the BCS gets, it has done a better job in crowning a consensus national champ than the system before (i.e. Georgia Tech claiming a portion of the National Championship in 1990 after winning the… Citrus Bowl?). Yes, I like to pick on Georgia Tech.

I am realist. I’m certainly in the minority in my way of thinking (especially among my demographic). I worry about the future of the bowls (not the game formerly known as the Papa John’s.com Bowl, but the Cotton, Rose, Sugar and Orange). A playoff is coming, so we all have to accept/embrace it.

Here are my playoff hopes. I want the bowls to be involved. Have a bowl season leading up to a 4-team playoff. The playoff would rotate at the sites of the current BCS bowls (wouldn’t mind seeing the Fiesta replaced with the Cotton either, but that’s another story). More than 4 teams would diminish the regular season I feel. Personally, I’d like to see the playoff selection process done Mike Slive’s way: top four ranked teams rather than a “conference champion” requirement. This would also keep polling in place, which has always been a staple of college football. Even though people would still complain, I think you get a more legitimate national champion. My 4-team playoff for 2011 would have been LSU, Alabama, Oklahoma State and Stanford. Oregon would have been mad, but, you’ll never please everyone, even with a playoff. Bottom line is, someone’s always going to feel left out (5th ranked team in a four team scenario, 9th ranked team in an eight team scenario, etc.).

If there were to be a “conference champion” requirement, here’s what I’d like to see: Four super-conferences with 16 teams each, broken up into 8 team divisions (blow up the Big East and Big 12 and have the ACC, Big Ten, Pac-12, and SEC collect the scraps). Each conference has a conference championship game, which would act as the first round of an 8-team playoff. Conference champions then move on to a 4-team playoff. However, in this scenario, out of conference games wouldn’t mean anything aside from bragging rights. This would also be bad for the small teams out there, but they don’t have a realistic shot in the current system either.

The college football landscape will change tremendously, and this will be a topic of high interest as more details of the 4-team format come to light over the next two years.

Sorry if I still haven’t gotten to your mail yet. Today’s question was a topic unto itself, but we’ve got some more good mail in the works this week. Remember, if you have a question, comment or topic idea, email me at mostlycollegefootballblog@gmail.com.

2 Responses to “My Draft Blunder and… College Football Playoffs?”

I like the superconference playoff scenerio. True it makes out of conference games less important aside from bragging rights, but I honestly think that is better. Top teams right now have an incentive to avoid tough out of conference games because it is another chance to lose. If teams could play those tough games (a home and home) without losing their shot a national championship in the first couple weeks of the season imagine some of the matchups we could see. The games would absolutely sell out, unlike a game a against a DII opponent and the national media coverage would be even more incentive. Imagine if week 2 of the season we had USC v Bama, Florida v Ohio St, UGA v Oklahoma, etc… it would be great for the fans.

I do agree that having a 4-team playoff will never please everyone because that fifth team will always gripe and complain about being left out and no matter how many teams you include, there will always be complaints (i.e. the NCAA Men’s Basketball tournament expanded to 68 teams and there are still programs complaining about being left out). However, I do feel like many of the bowls need to be eliminated (i.e. GoDaddy.com Bowl and Famous Idaho Potato Bowl). I know collegiate officials and athletic directors want to include as many teams in the “post-season” bowl activities, however, I have a difficult time rationalizing that teams with 6-6 and 6-7 records should be eligible to be invited to these bowl games.

In addition, with this 4-team playoff, I think the fairest way to go about these “semi-final” games is to have the higher seed host the lower seed at their stadium. This would assist in maintaining some of the importance of the regular season because teams would have more of an incentive to earn the top seeds versus having these games at neutral sites.

Personally, I think this 4-team playoff proposal will eventually expand to 8 teams. There are still a lot of questions that need to be answered with the conference championships and how winning those will not guarantee a team admittance into this 4-team playoff [as there are currently 6 power conferences and only 4 spots available]. Because of this problem, it is only conceivable that this number will expand to include more teams.